[deleted]

Somalia had great opportunities, second only to north african countries, to become a wealthy African country, yet today when someone talks about Somalia everyone thinks about Pirates, civil war and a state of quasi-anarchy, what happened ? Why did the Civil war erupt ? What made Somalia so unstable ?

A nuclear weapon is extremely powerful; surely he would love to have one before America developed their own.

I'm currently doing a history assignment on the Tokugawa shogunate, and I'm considering picking the battle of sekigahara as my focus point. I've been looking around for some good reliable sources on this but haven't been too lucky, so was hoping you guys could assist me?

[deleted]

Yeah, I know that they were people who lived in Troy and were known for the famous mythological Trojan war, but what I really want to know is where did they come from, and which other civilizations were the people related to genetically.

Unlike basically anywhere else in the United States, Louisiana has historically hosted a vibrant, influential, and financially solvent community of Creole people of mixed French and African descent. The whole existence of this community defies a lot of our expectations about race in the USA, but these people are essential to the history of New Orleans.

So how did Creole people react to Louisiana's decision to secede from the USA in defence of slavery? Were these people generally Unionists or did many work with the new government? Did many Creoles own slaves themselves?

Because New Orleans was probably the biggest port of the Confederacy, this community was probably pretty important during that period.

In popular culture, Thomas Edison often gets a lot of shit and denouncement while tesla is admired. He is often portrayed as a greedy businessman who takes credit for other inventors work, who screwed over tesla, money hungry and sometimes a sadist who electrocuted a elephant to death for no reason. So what's the truth? Was this guy really so fucked up.

People often say that the AK was designed to replace the submachine gun in Russian service (russia never developeding a post war SMG reinforces this point) and that it was designed to be fired on fully automatic, not semi automatic in 2-3 round bursts but is there any documentation to support this? I.e. period documents, doctrine documents, manuals of use etc?

During a guided tour of Tallinn, Estonia, the guide told us that the first Christmas tree (a pine tree) was put up in Tallinn by a rowdy group of young merchants from the Black Head Guild. The tree was set on fire and this happened over a few years, until a house burned down, and the city administration banned the burning of the tree, so the next year it was decorated with a bunch of lanterns to give the impression of a burning tree. SinceTallinn/Reval was part of the Hanseatic League, from there it spread to other European/German cities. The guide mentioned that these are verifiable facts, because the Black Head Guild tended to keep good records. Can someone knowledgeable comment on this, please, as I am really hoping that this is true.

Even that early in the war the Japanese must have recognized the importance of aircraft carriers in any future naval battles with United States. If they were looking for a knock-out blow then why not concentrate on that? If nothing else why didn't their fleet try pursuing any aircraft carriers already at sea?

I’m reading about the Plains Wars and most of the US Army generals are of Northern and former Union stock. I was wondering if any former Confederate generals or leaders rejoined the US Army after the war and fought the Native Americans out west?

I've heard this narrative both in Portugal and Catalonia (the point being historical solidarity between the two), and I wonder if there's some truth to it.

Was there coordination or causality between the revolts? And is it really accepted that Spain was overwhelmed by them and didn't have the resources to deal with both, having to make a conscious decision to prioritize the suppression of Catalonia?

How did King Philip IV and III assess the crisis, and what was his real strategy to deal with it?

[deleted]

I am aware that Austria declined to join the French but I am curious why didn't any other great nation such as Italy, Britain, Russia? I know in the 19th century, Europe was ruled by a Concert of Great Powers where nations tried have a balance of power so that no one single nation becomes too powerful. So why didn't the great powers intervene because Prussia as itself was a formidable Country and wouldn't a united Germany under Prussian militarism and the sheer industrial capacity of a Untied Germany would have scared the great powers to intervene? Germany already beated Austria in 1866, proving it once again her army wasn't anything to scoff about,so as I said again, wouldn't a Untied Germany have greatly shift the balance of power and thus making the balance of power unstable? I understand Bismarck may have used his diplomatic abilities but I still don't see how No other great power didn't see the threat of Prussia becoming even more powerful

The Hellespont looks like it has more water, so the bridge he had to build would be longer. If he built near Byzantium, he would have had a shorter bridge to build, and therefore would have crossed quicker.

I read online that a Roman Senator needed something like 600 acres to qualify as a senator. This is alot less than many landed knights in england who might have had 1000 acres ( a small village). Who was owning all the land in Italy if not the Senators? Has their wealth been exagerated?

There are a lot of parallels between Ireland and Portugal:

1. Both are small countries with similar population and area.
2. Both are located in Western Europe, on the Atlantic coast, a privileged location to embark on a colonization trip to the New World.
3. Both have had a larger, more powerful kingdom on the East trying to annex them (Spain and England/United Kingdom).

So then, why did Portugal become a colonial power while Ireland didn't? Why Portugal could retain its independence from Spain while Ireland couldn't from England? Unlike Portugal, Ireland is an island and it should have been harder for British troops to keep control of it.